next »

[TacoBell_Lord]

Let me start by saying I dislike MMOGs for one reason; Monster & Enemy Agency is kind've stripped from Narrative Emergence & the Plot-Lore is weakened due to the Spawning & Minimal Importance of Quest/Exploration. Everytime I try to get into a MMOG, the handling of the destructive natures that lie ahead is watered down by the Crack-induced focus on Player Retention & Grinding. I feel as MMORPGs sorta ruined Major Enemies with a cautious & alerting presence in the world due to the high-focus on the End-Goal rather than the Plot Importance & Setting, especially seeing massive enemies that spawn in the same area kills the Lore completely.

What i love from a more linear aspect of RPGs is the hype built from the Enemy/Antagonist ventures & theoretical progress/exposition in the world at play. Kefka was a sick bastard due to his impulsive destructive behavior that led to the end of the world. Imagine if there was a field of Kefkas spawning in a field out somewhere, where you had to fight him because of the lust of a sword you get as a end-goal? That would be shit & take away from the agency of the opponent. The hype built around the NPCs knowledge of the Enemies presence is what brings out the best of Exploration, the rising danger intertwined with the Player's Progression on a one's care for the Narrative rather than a new sword or shield.

What does your Antagonists mean to your world? How are they structured to "fuck shit up" when times get nasty? What games does Enemy Agency that influenced you? What games did a bad job handling the Enemies' Importance to the world?

[Moth]

What i love from a more linear aspect of RPGs is the hype built from the Enemy/Antagonist ventures & theoretical progress/exposition in the world at play. Kefka was a sick bastard due to his impulsive destructive behavior that led to the end of the world. Imagine if there was a field of Kefkas spawning in a field out somewhere, where you had to fight him because of the lust of a sword you get as a end-goal?

I don't think you can really compare these two things across the board. Kefka is a plot intensive NPC, and MMORPGs have those too. In World of Warcraft there is only one Onyxia who, much like Kefka, is built up through lore, dies in a cutscene in a closed linear environment, etc...

There are (beloved) linear single player RPGs with stuff you have to mindlessly grind for, too; that's not limited to MMORPGs. Earthbound has a lot of items that have only a 1/128 chance of dropping. I do understand what you mean when you say MMORPGs have an abundance of it, though.

(edit: also, I love outlaw star!!)

[rocketh]

Some major MMORPGs - I'm thinking WoW and FFXIV - are trying to fix the issue of having enemies deprived of any narrative and / or importance, aside being loot-pignatas.

For WoW, Pandaria made a great job introducing and showcasing major bosses alongside its course. For each one, dedicated narratives and side story lines were added, as well. All climaxing in the final boss encounter at the end of the raid.

FFXIV has always been quite story-heavy, so it's no surprise they're building up a larger narrative which will eventually reach its climax right before the new expansion. The villains they introduced with 2.0 are plotting and influencing events for months, we'll see what they end up with.

[s0]

There are (beloved) linear single player RPGs with stuff you have to mindlessly grind for, too; that's not limited to MMORPGs. Earthbound has a lot of items that have only a 1/128 chance of dropping. I do understand what you mean when you say MMORPGs have an abundance of it, though.

also in most jrpgs, the normal enemies you spend the majority of the game fighting have 0 relation to the story or anything else. at most, they're vaguely themed around the area you encounter them in. the only story relevant battles are boss battles.

[Alec S.]

This is something I've been interested in for a while.

I'm currently working on a game where the goal is to have enemies (and by extension non-enemy NPCs) have a significant degree of agency and have their own goals which they work towards over the course of the game (in a systemic way, rather than scripted as part of a pre-determined plot).  Rather than just narrative agency, it's also mechanical agency. 

The easiest way to stop the villain from completing his plans in most RPGs is to just dick around the world without progressing the main story.  They are powerless against it because they are unable to act without your prompting. 

X-COM did enemy agency really well, in that you were fighting an enemy that was constantly acting on its own and getting stronger/more dangerous.  If you fell behind, the enemy would keep going and overtake you.

[CursedSmilodon]

An antagonist for me isn't someone who shows up to say "haha! I am free! Now I will destroy all the good things because I'm bad!"

A well done antagonist will have motives that would be understandable to someone in that position (a CEO caring only about the bottom line because it makes him/her richer, or a very xenophobic military leader hatching a plot to purge the undesirable people (ala the antagonist from Antz))

The most interesting antagonists are almost ALWAYS the antagonist that the player can relate to in some way, if you can get the player to feel empathetic towards the antagonist in a good way (Not the "I'm evil because I was wronged in my past" way)